Agricultural Land

The Planning Commission decided late Tuesday night to defer voting until March on a controversial land-use proposal that would dramatically reduce the amount of development permitted on agricultural land. The decision came after a three-hour public hearing in which rural landowners complained the proposal would diminish the value of their land. The commission then asked for a financial analysis on impact the zoning changes would have on the county's tax base. The commission will review the analysis at a work session on February and then vote on the zoning proposal at its March 14 meeting, according to Sanjay Jeer, the county's acting director of long-range planning.

An average 5.5 percent real estate assessment increase this year must have been easier for residents to swallow than the 41.7 percent increase from 2006. About 500 people attended hearings or sent letters or e-mails or made phone calls about their assessments this year. Last time, it was at least twice that many, said Steve Wampler. He's president of the Wampler-Eanes Appraisal Group, the Roanoke-area firm that handled the assessments this year and in 2006. The county reassesses real estate every two years.

An average 5.5 percent real estate assessment increase this year must have been easier for residents to swallow than the 41.7 percent increase from 2006. About 500 people attended hearings or sent letters or e-mails or made phone calls about their assessments this year. Last time, it was at least twice that many, said Steve Wampler. He's president of the Wampler-Eanes Appraisal Group, the Roanoke-area firm that handled the assessments this year and in 2006. The county reassesses real estate every two years.

A proposal to preserve farmland by having the county buy the development rights to properties was well received by the James City County Board of Supervisors Wednesday. While the supervisors have additional suggestions for the program, they support the concept and are asking county staff to take the next few months to gauge interest and advice from the community before officially adopting the program. The proposed Purchase of Development Rights program aims to protect the county's agricultural land from turning into a subdivision, retail center or other kind of development by allowing the county to buy the development rights from farm owners.

The Planning Commission voted 6-1 on Monday to approve a draft of the county's revised Comprehensive Plan, with Commissioner Jay Everson casting the dissenting vote. The draft of the plan, the county's vision for the next five years, is scheduled to come before the Board of Supervisors on Nov. 26. Everson said he voted against the draft for several reasons, including a policy that would have county staff automatically recommend denial of new residential developments in districts where schools are more than 20 percent over capacity.

Faced with a storm of protest over a sweeping downzoning proposal for agricultural land, county supervisors are rethinking their support for the measure. Four of the five supervisors now say they are either opposed to the plan, are leaning against it or favor reworking it. Only Supervisor Jack D. Edwards, the board's steadfast supporter of growth controls, said he endorses the plan as drafted. "It either needs to be negotiated and fine-tuned before it comes to the board, or we need to stop considering it," board chairman Thomas D. Mahone said Thursday.

The county Board of Supervisors will meet Monday to discuss the merits of a sweeping land-use proposal that would restrict development on about 40,000 acres of agricultural land. The controversial measure, as proposed by staff, would prohibit a variety of commercial uses now allowed by right on agricultural land, such as convenience stores, some offices, warehouses and gift shops. It would also increase the minimum lot size of a single-family house from one acre to 10 acres, dramatically reducing the number of homes that could be built on such land.

Members of the Plan Advisory Committee got their first look Tuesday at a draft of the county's comprehensive plan, which will map its growth over the next 20 years. The draft Comprehensive Growth Management Plan projects a population of 47,000 in the year 2010, up more than 50 percent, over the estimated 1988 population of 30,000. More than 70 percent of the new growth will be confined to three areas slated for the heaviest residential, commercial and industrial development.

The Planning Commission voted 9-2 Tuesday night in favor of a scaled-down land-use proposal that restricts development on 40,000 acres of agricultural land. The revised proposal, hammered out last week, would increase from about one acre to three acres the minimum lot size for new homes on agricultural land. New residential subdivisions could be built with an average density of one unit per two acres, under a special-use permit. In addition, convenience stores, offices, shops and other commercial uses currently allowed by right would require special-use permits.

A proposal to preserve farmland by having the county buy the development rights to properties was well received by the James City County Board of Supervisors Wednesday. While the supervisors have additional suggestions for the program, they support the concept and are asking county staff to take the next few months to gauge interest and advice from the community before officially adopting the program. The proposed Purchase of Development Rights program aims to protect the county's agricultural land from turning into a subdivision, retail center or other kind of development by allowing the county to buy the development rights from farm owners.

James City County has a plan to protect area farms and forestland from becoming retail centers or subdivisions. In a memorandum to Board of Supervisors members Friday, Donald E. Davis, principal planner for the county, outlined a Purchase of Development Rights program. The board will discuss the proposal at a meeting Wednesday. The program would allow the county to purchase development rights from someone who owns a farm or forestland, protecting the land forever. In exchange, the landowner would be paid the difference between how much the land is worth in its current agricultural or natural state and how much it's worth if developed residentially or commercially.

The Planning Commission voted 6-1 on Monday to approve a draft of the county's revised Comprehensive Plan, with Commissioner Jay Everson casting the dissenting vote. The draft of the plan, the county's vision for the next five years, is scheduled to come before the Board of Supervisors on Nov. 26. Everson said he voted against the draft for several reasons, including a policy that would have county staff automatically recommend denial of new residential developments in districts where schools are more than 20 percent over capacity.

A county official who foresees no loss of tax revenue caused by the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act, has criticized the Peninsula Chamber of Commerce for acting too quickly in commissioning its impact study. John T.P. Horne, manager of development and management, responding to the chamber study at the request of the county Board of Supervisors, criticized the study for reducing land values to agricultural levels to compute tax revenue. Forty-seven Virginia localities are required by state law to adopt ordinances to control a land development that might add to pollution of the Chesapeake Bay. James City was the first locality to do so and one of the few to meet the Sept.

Members of the Plan Advisory Committee got their first look Tuesday at a draft of the county's comprehensive plan, which will map its growth over the next 20 years. The draft Comprehensive Growth Management Plan projects a population of 47,000 in the year 2010, up more than 50 percent, over the estimated 1988 population of 30,000. More than 70 percent of the new growth will be confined to three areas slated for the heaviest residential, commercial and industrial development.

Maintaining the county's rural character will require careful balancing between the interests of farmers and residential developers, the county's comprehensive plan consultant told planners Thursday. Tony Redman, from the consulting firm of Redman-Johnston Associates, told the comprehensive plan advisory committee that although some people may favor zoning laws that make it more difficult to rezone farmland, farmers may find that such laws infringe on property rights. The plan advisory committee reviewed issue papers on agricultural preservation and growth management at a work session Thursday night.

The Planning Commission voted 9-2 Tuesday night in favor of a scaled-down land-use proposal that restricts development on 40,000 acres of agricultural land. The revised proposal, hammered out last week, would increase from about one acre to three acres the minimum lot size for new homes on agricultural land. New residential subdivisions could be built with an average density of one unit per two acres, under a special-use permit. In addition, convenience stores, offices, shops and other commercial uses currently allowed by right would require special-use permits.

IW SCHOOL BOARD CANCELS WORK SESSION ISLE OF WIGHT - The School Board's scheduled budget work session for tonight has been canceled. The board's next meeting will be its monthly meeting at 7:30 p.m. Feb. 10 at the county courthouse complex. PLANNERS DEFER VOTE ON LAND USE JAMES CITY (County) - The Planning Commission decided late Tuesday night to defer voting until March on a controversial land-use proposal that would dramatically reduce the amount of development permitted on agricultural land.

Maintaining the county's rural character will require careful balancing between the interests of farmers and residential developers, the county's comprehensive plan consultant told planners Thursday. Tony Redman, from the consulting firm of Redman-Johnston Associates, told the comprehensive plan advisory committee that although some people may favor zoning laws that make it more difficult to rezone farmland, farmers may find that such laws infringe on property rights. The plan advisory committee reviewed issue papers on agricultural preservation and growth management at a work session Thursday night.

Faced with a storm of protest over a sweeping downzoning proposal for agricultural land, county supervisors are rethinking their support for the measure. Four of the five supervisors now say they are either opposed to the plan, are leaning against it or favor reworking it. Only Supervisor Jack D. Edwards, the board's steadfast supporter of growth controls, said he endorses the plan as drafted. "It either needs to be negotiated and fine-tuned before it comes to the board, or we need to stop considering it," board chairman Thomas D. Mahone said Thursday.

A controversial land-use measure that would dramatically reduce development permitted on agricultural land would not lower property values and would not damage the county's tax base, a new county survey says. The survey results contradict the claims of large landowners, who fear the proposal to downzone 40,000 acres would reduce the value of their land. Those property owners and some land appraisers were skeptical of the survey's accuracy. "You would have to be right around the age of being potty-trained to believe something like that," said David Ware Jr., whose family owns about 425 acres in James City County.